Cleveland v. Eichengreen

205 Ill. App. 300, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 1110
Appellate Court of Illinois·Decided April 16, 1917·No. Gen. No. 22,853·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Mr. Presiding Justice McSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.

2. Garnishment—when garnishee is not entitled to retain money pending writ of error. A garnishee in an attachment action has no right after the attachment has been quashed, and an order discharging him as garnishee has been entered, to retain the money during the pendency of a writ of error where no supersedeas was allowed, and he was not a party to the writ of error, and no notice of its issuance had been served upon him, and the writ was never filed with the clerk of the court to which such writ issued. 3. Appeal and error, § 710*—what is effect of supersedeas. A supersedeas suspends the efficacy of a judgment, but does not, like reversal, annul the judgment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cleveland v. Eichengreen, 205 Ill. App. 300, 1917 Ill. App. LEXIS 1110 (Ill. Ct. App. 1917).

205 Ill. App. 300 (Cleveland v. Eichengreen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. La Porte Building Corp. ex rel. Boland
274 Ill. App. 335 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1934)